[QUOTE="walter429"]Microsoft lost billions of dollars too and their not the industry leader (as far as consoles) and they don't exactly have a big "lead"in xbox 360 AAA and AA games and they really only have "marketshare" in the US and the 360 is being out sold in every region but North America by the PS3. Nintendo was always the only competition... now they're winning because they released a gimmick fad with new zeldas and marios at the cheapest price. I'd call that fact too.link to microsoft losing billions of dollars?
1. Market Share 2. Billions of dollars 3. Exclusive franchises 4. Lead in the Market
1.)PS2 136, PS3 23, PSP 52 = Sony 211 million. Wii 50, DS 102 = Nintendo 152 million. 360 30 = MS 30 million. 2.) Does Sony openly give out that information? 3.) Wheres the list to tell if it is "nearlly all"? 4.) Does this have something to do with number one?
LOXO7
1. You're counting a last generation console and a portable to try and strengthen your argument when this is specifically regarding consoles. Sad. 2. Every publicly traded company does yes. 3. Where's the list? Sony has no big third party franchises exclusives. After MGS they're all gone. 4. Yes.
[QUOTE="lionsnakes"][QUOTE="LOXO7"]All of these are suspicions. 1-5. Where are all of your trustworthy links?Animal-Mother
Do you really need links? Or have you been living under a rock for the past three years? Let's review them again. 1. Most of their marketshare: FACT 2. Billions of dollars: FACT 3. Nearly all of their third party exclusive franchises: FACT 4. Their place as the industry leader: FACT 5. Their lead in total AAA and AA reviewed games: FACT Yes because without links then it's just nonsense. And you like I said you mentioned franchises that were lost many years ago. and as Clone01 said sony's not far behind if anything that list he provided say it's pretty much caught up. I mean you say their lead in AAA and AA were lost but didnt infamous score AAA 2-3 weeks ago?If you're going to post on this board, it's your obligation to educate yourself on what's going on in this industry. Otherwise you make yourself look (fill in the blank) with comments like this. I'm not going to look for links on what is now common knowledge, but I tell you what, you can look for links to try to prove any of these points wrong if you want to, of course you wont be able to because everything I said is true.
All of these are suspicions. 1-5. Where are all of your trustworthy links?LOXO7
Do you really need links? Or have you been living under a rock for the past three years? Let's review them again. 1. Most of their marketshare: FACT 2. Billions of dollars: FACT 3. Nearly all of their third party exclusive franchises: FACT 4. Their place as the industry leader: FACT 5. Their lead in total AAA and AA reviewed games: FACT
[QUOTE="clone01"][QUOTE="lionsnakes"][QUOTE="clone01"] so how does this relate to the PS3? if anything, it supports the PS3, as you are saying that the PS3 might lose, and then regain momentum. The PS2 had plenty of momentum from the get go. It sold so well that game sales quickly recouped on the money they initially lost on the hardware. For PS3 this simply isn't the case. Sony got killed on R&D developing the cell. Hardware sales have been slow from the get go, and as a result first party game sales have suffered tremendously and thus they continue to bleed more and more money even now three years in. however, you just said that the PS2 lost billions (questionable credibility) into its lifecycle. so its the same thing, right?PS2 didnt lose billions at any point nor did I say that. Can you point me to where I did? You wont be able to because you're making it up. Questionable credibility indeed.
[QUOTE="Gangstah-Fresh"][QUOTE="lionsnakes"][QUOTE="Gangstah-Fresh"] I guess you are not familiar with the ideas of investments/returns. Sony did anticipate loses during the initial years of the PS3, which is why there was almost no money spent on advertising. They expect the PS3 to rise year by year for a 10 year period. You can see this by the games they are announcing and at the times they are doing this. Although I don't have family who work for sony(honestly how much times do people claim this), I am simply a citizen who understands economics. Sony is a large company, with a lot of branches, developers, engineers, economists, and a whole assortment of nice stuff under it's belt (like Microsoft) you think a company as old and as reputed as Sony was blind sided by initial loses for their PS3? Sony Microsoft and other large companies can afford losses in the hopes of long term gains. Funny.... I don't remember the PS2 losing billions of dollars three years into its lifecycle, being in last place, and having such underwhelming selling first party software. Companies that use the same strategies over and over again fail. Clearly you do not understand global economics. I will not reply to anything else you have to say, as it seems that you have a thing against Sony for some reason.... So you're saying it's Sony's strategy to lose billions of dollars? Take off the fanboy goggles.
[QUOTE="lionsnakes"]Funny.... I don't remember the PS2 losing billions of dollars three years into its lifecycle, being in last place, and having such underwhelming selling first party software. clone01
so how does this relate to the PS3? if anything, it supports the PS3, as you are saying that the PS3 might lose, and then regain momentum. The PS2 had plenty of momentum from the get go. It sold so well that game sales quickly recouped on the money they initially lost on the hardware. For PS3 this simply isn't the case. Sony got killed on R&D developing the cell. Hardware sales have been slow from the get go, and as a result first party game sales have suffered tremendously and thus they continue to bleed more and more money even now three years in.
[QUOTE="clone01"] again, how do sales = quality, particularly looking at the previously provided chart?You're flip flopping between arguments again. You' just said Sony hasn't failed. Sony is a business no? A business that is losing money hand over fist and most of their market share is failing no? You're argument about game quality is also lacking. PS2 had by far the most AAA, AA and A software, and this gen the 360 does, so Sony has lost plenty of momentum in that front as well.
[QUOTE="Gangstah-Fresh"][QUOTE="lionsnakes"][QUOTE="clone01"] he did nothing like that. and sony isn't close to failing.So you're avoiding the last argument you got proven wrong in and your jumping to this one? How is losing billions of dollars and most of your marketshare not failing in your opinion? I guess you are not familiar with the ideas of investments/returns. Sony did anticipate loses during the initial years of the PS3, which is why there was almost no money spent on advertising. They expect the PS3 to rise year by year for a 10 year period. You can see this by the games they are announcing and at the times they are doing this. Although I don't have family who work for sony(honestly how much times do people claim this), I am simply a citizen who understands economics. Sony is a large company, with a lot of branches, developers, engineers, economists, and a whole assortment of nice stuff under it's belt (like Microsoft) you think a company as old and as reputed as Sony was blind sided by initial loses for their PS3? Sony Microsoft and other large companies can afford losses in the hopes of long term gains. Funny.... I don't remember the PS2 losing billions of dollars three years into its lifecycle, being in last place, and having such underwhelming selling first party software.
Log in to comment